14 ms·
> The article falls directly into the "good old days" fallacy This comment falls directly into the "things never change" fallacy. This fallacy can be applied
by e67f70028a46fba 8y ago
> The article falls directly into the "good old days" fallacy
This comment falls directly into the "things never change" fallacy.
This fallacy can be applied whenever anyone complains about any change anywhere. Picking one sample piece of anecdotal data from another period that can roughly be lined up with some other vague impressions of today does not refute the claim.
I have no strong opinion on overtourism or the effects on it by social media, but I'm willing to listen to people who discuss it without dismissing them.
- kartan 8y ago> This comment falls directly into the "things never change" fallacy. That sounds interesting. I looked for it, and I just found references to the "tradition fallacy" that only deals with resistance to change. Can you provide a link? > Picking one sample piece of anecdotal data from another period that can roughly be lined up with some other vague impressions of today does not refute the claim. I provided an anecdote example as a means to be more pedagogic. It is easier to understand concepts from the concrete to the abstract. So you are completely right, my anecdote does not refute the claim.
- pasabagi 8y agoI guess the oldest quote would be in the bible, as "there's no new thing under the sun". In any case though, I don't really understand the point of using 'fallacy' aside from cases where it's an actual logical fallacy. You can probably cover every habit of thought and discourse under a banner of fallacy, if you pick out the ways in which they are used badly - since people tend to think badly due to misapplied habits.